|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Changing World Order | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9142 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3
|
Do what? Make decisions to keep the economy from collapsing? The purpose of government is not to protect personal wealth. It is to support the commonweal.
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
When you get their opinions back, please quote them. I dont care about their names or party affiliation. I trust you. If you respect an "expert" I will listen to that "expert".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Theodoric writes: Commonweal? I assume you mean commonwealth. So what is commonwealth?
The purpose of government is not to protect personal wealth. It is to support the commonweal.Oxford Languages writes: Commonwealth: an independent country or community, especially a democratic republic. so are we a Democracy or a Republic? As a moderate, I'd say both.
1. an aggregate or grouping of countries or other bodies."a union or commonwealth of democratic, self-governing countries" a community or organization of shared interests in a nonpolitical field. "the Christian commonwealth" a self-governing unit voluntarily grouped with the US, such as Puerto Rico. "the island became a commonwealth of the United States in 1986" a formal title of some of the states of the US, especially Kentucky, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. the title of the federated Australian states. the republican period of government in Britain between the execution of Charles I in 1649 and the Restoration of Charles II in 1660. singular proper noun: Commonwealth 2. an international association consisting of the UK together with states that were previously part of the British Empire, and dependencies. The British monarch is the symbolic head of the Commonwealth. 3) (archaic)-the general good. Imagine a global commonwealth. In my mind, this would equate to a One World Government. At this point in time, I can see no way that such a concept would hold together. After all, if we here in the US have partisan political bickering, how on earth would the added complexities of global governance ever survive in unity?( From now on, I will address the Literalist "dogma" of an Antichrist keeping our secular discussion in mind)This discussion is mos def *not* about religious dogma or any actual or hypothetical "antichrists" but I will say that if such a character ever sprung up, he would never be a conservative like Trump. He likely would spring from the bowels of the CCP. Anyway, getting back to my main point. If in fact a commonwealth can equate to a common interest, I would argue that the purpose of said government is to protect common interest. It only makes sense that a common trait of a common interest is to protect individual wealth as well as community "wealth". Right? (unless you are a far left Marxist ) Edited by Phat, : spelling
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
ringo writes:
I thought i used the Dictionary! You call me authoritarian without knowing what it means.quote:When have I ever suggested anything resembling that? Phat writes:
I don't bore you in every post blathering about macaroni.
ringo writes:
Well I don't care what you think of macaroni either. I don't care what you think about gold. Phat writes:
That does illustrate what you don't understand about authoritarianism.
And if the government seized your macaroni, you might then learn what I see authoritarianism as. Phat writes:
That's a worthless what-if. Obviously, I would pay it. What if they seized your stored up box of macaroni, offered you 25 cents for it, then raised the official price of macaroni to $1.00? And it has nothing to do with authoritariansim. What if the government lowered the speed limit to 55 mph? What if the government taxed liquor and tobacco? What if the government taxed gasoline? What if the government taxed everything you buy? You need to learn that everything the government does is not necessarily authoritarian.Come all of you cowboys all over this land, I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command: To hold a six shooter, and never to run As long as there's bullets in both of your guns. -- Woody Guthrie
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
ringo writes: I need a bi-partisan government. I need a two-party system. I don't "need" one collective of "we". Why? Because *we* often disagree. I wont simply have a gang of"we" telling me what I must do, in the name of ...well take your pick: What more do you need?in the name of humanity. (that's a laugh!) In the name of Jesus. In the name of Mono-secularism. ((see? I just invented that word... I think. : ) We can discuss this rabbit trail more at Message 191 Edited by Phat, : added link
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
Wrong. It only makes sense that a common trait of a common interest is to protect individual wealth as well as community "wealth". Right? The "common good" is not served by individual wealth. Individual wealth subtracts from community wealth. Your beloved "offshore system" streals from the community wealth in favor of individual wealth. When are you going to stop supporting Phat writes:
Stop spouting far-right propaganda and learn what Marxism is. (unless you are a far left Marxist.)Come all of you cowboys all over this land, I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command: To hold a six shooter, and never to run As long as there's bullets in both of your guns. -- Woody Guthrie
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
ringo writes: I'm not. Im supporting individualism at *your* expense. When are you going to stop supporting slavery the rich at your own expense? I'm in internet school this morning before I take a nap and go to work. I started thinking about the word that sprung up in my head...namely monosecularism.This led me to Wiki and to this: Slavic Native Faith's identity and political philosophy Note the following quotes from the article wiki: I will spout propaganda from both sides. You only spout it from one side.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
Stop trying to evade. ringo writes:
I need a bi-partisan government. What more do you need? In Message 141 you asked, "Apart from Trump and populism, what specifically is bad about the Republican Party of today?" In Message 142 I replied, "The Republicans let Trump get away with his crimes. What more do you need? They obstruct Congress. What more do you need?" We were talking about what is bad about the Republican Party. So answer the question I asked: What do you need besides letting Trump get away with his crimes and general obstruction of Congress?
Phat writes:
So you DON'T need a party that obstructs the duly-elected party in power.
I need a bi-partisan government. I need a two-party system. Phat writes:
Have you ever heard of co-operation? Have you ever heard of compromise? I don't "need" one collective of "we". The whole idea of democracy is to give diverse viewpoints a say.
Phat writes:
Of course we do. Do you want to just ride rough-shod over minority ideas? Again, the point of democracy IS "we", not "me".
Why? Because *we* often disagree. Phat writes:
You damn well WILL do what the government says. Who do you think you are? Che Guevara?
I wont simply have a gang of"we" telling me what I must do... Phat writes:
Your contempt for humanity is well-known. It's one of the ugliest characteristics of your ugly religion. ... in the name of ...well take your pick:in the name of humanity. (that's a laugh!) Come all of you cowboys all over this land, I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command: To hold a six shooter, and never to run As long as there's bullets in both of your guns. -- Woody Guthrie
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
Y'know, there's a "Preview" button right beside the "Submit Reply" button. Maybe you should read what you're about to post before submitting such an infernally stupid reply. Im supporting individualism at *your* expense. I AM an individual, you moron. How can you support me against myself?
Phat writes:
Feel free to point to any propaganda that i have spouted. I will spout propaganda from both sides. You only spout it from one side.Come all of you cowboys all over this land, I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command: To hold a six shooter, and never to run As long as there's bullets in both of your guns. -- Woody Guthrie
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
rigo writes: Only if I also get to learn what Capitalism is.
Stop spouting far-right propaganda and learn what Marxism is. The "common good" is not served by individual wealth. Tell that to Henry Ford. His company, Ford Motor Company, helped win World War II.
Individual wealth subtracts from community wealth. Its a good thing that *we* didn't take Henry's individual wealth and give it to FDR. He did it himself voluntarily. And likely earned a small profit making tanks...or at least broke even. Individual Wealth is good. Don't believe everything you hear.
Your beloved "offshore system" streals from the community wealth in favor of individual wealth. You seem to believe the idea that there *should* be no individual wealth. And then you have the gall to trot out Jesus to support your warped far left Marxist views. Am I wrong?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
ringo writes: That's what the antichrist will do. He will argue that since Jesus never existed, *we* must all be moral individuals and we *must* support the collective (One World Government) I AM an individual, you moron. How can you support me against myself? According to the Bible, He is the bad guy. ringo writes: Feel free to point to any propaganda that I have spouted. This whole idea that there is (or should be) no individual wealth and that we would be noble and honorable people if we supported the collective.(The commonwealth). It sounds good in theory but were such a government authoritarian and dictatorial (out of necessity, of course. ) we would have problems.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
By all means, learn all you can.
ringo writes:
Only if I also get to learn what Capitalism is. Stop spouting far-right propaganda and learn what Marxism is. Phat writes:
Tell that to Hitler. He supported the individual wealth of the Krupp family but World War II ITSELF was not for the common good. There would not have BEEN a World War II if the common good was the goal.
The "common good" is not served by individual wealth.Tell that to Henry Ford. His company, Ford Motor Company, helped win World War II. Phat writes:
How is it a "good thing" if he did it himself but not if "we" took it?
Its a good thing that *we* didn't take Henry's individual wealth and give it to FDR. He did it himself voluntarily. Phat writes:
You say that without any evidence to support it.
Individual Wealth is good. Phat writes:
Look in the mirror.
Don't believe everything you hear. Phat writes:
Stop dreaming about what "seems" to be and respond to what I actually said.
ringo writes:
You seem to believe the idea that there *should* be no individual wealth. Your beloved "offshore system" streals from the community wealth in favor of individual wealth. Phat writes:
Nothing I have said is remotely far-left or Marxist. And then you have the gall to trot out Jesus to support your warped far left Marxist views. And YOU have a lot of gall even mentioning Jesus when you spit on everything He said.
Phat writes:
Yes. Am I wrong?Come all of you cowboys all over this land, I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command: To hold a six shooter, and never to run As long as there's bullets in both of your guns. -- Woody Guthrie
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
ringo writes: Interesting. What would you call it? Moderate?
Nothing I have said is remotely far-left or Marxist.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
Again, you quote me and then go off on a tangent that has nothing to do with what I said. The anti-christ will not change the meaning of words.
ringo writes:
That's what the antichrist will do. I AM an individual, you moron. How can you support me against myself? Phat writes:
No. He obviously will not. He will pretend to BE Jesus.
He will argue that since Jesus never existed... Phat writes:
Do you disagree with that?
... *we* must all be moral individuals... Phat writes:
We must render unto Caesar. (But the Jesus in your head never said that either, I suppose.)
... and we *must* support the collective... Phat writes:
We already have one, by the way, the United Nations, which has done a lot of good in the world, despite the idiots who try to thwart it. ... (One World Government) And your hatred of governments in general is well-known. It does you no credit.
Phat writes:
Who said that? This whole idea that there is (or should be) no individual wealth ... This is what I mean about you spouting right-wing propaganda. THEY say that's what I think and you swallow it hook, line and sinker without paying the slightest attention to what I actually say.
Phat writes:
Are you saying it's a bad thing to be noble and honorable? Or are you saying that stealing from the collective to build our individual wealth is a good thing?
... and that we would be noble and honorable people if we supported the collective. Phat writes:
There is no reason to think that a government is "authoritarian" or "dictatorial" just because they disagree with you. It sounds good in theory but were such a government authoritarian and dictatorial (out of necessity, of course. ) we would have problems.Come all of you cowboys all over this land, I'll teach you the law of the Ranger's Command: To hold a six shooter, and never to run As long as there's bullets in both of your guns. -- Woody Guthrie
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18299 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
ringo writes: OK. Explain to me how *we* could have achieved and implemented a common good that benefited Americans, Japanese, Germans and Russians all at the same time.
World War II ITSELF was not for the common good. There would not have BEEN a World War II if the common good was the goal.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024